UDC

130.121:18

Authors

Ekaterina S. Mishura
National Research University Higher School of Economics; ul. Staraya Basmannaya 21/4, str. 1, Moscow, 105066, Russian Federation; e-mail: ekaterinavasilieva15@gmail.com

Abstract

Michel Henry is an influential French phenomenologist, whose philosophy has been poorly presented and studied in Russia. First of all, this philosopher is known for his research into the phenomenology of life and affectivity, as well as for his analysis of abstract painting. This article is an attempt to substantiate the connection between Henry’s epistemological and aesthetic reflections. In particular, the paper shows that aestheticization of sense is a result of the epistemological project of non-intentional phenomenology by Michel Henry. The source of all meaning in Henry’s philosophy is the proto-phenomenon of life, which is purely affective. From Henry’s perspective, intentional sense formation described by Edmund Husserl is incapable of perceiving these affective meanings without distortion. As a result, the process of sense formation inevitably becomes a domain of affectivity. The author of this article suggests that aesthetic experience is the most affective field of experience that allows one to establish a correspondence between inner experience and external expression. As a consequence, it becomes the most meaningful realm in Henry’s philosophical project. In the first part of the article the author reveals the main points of Henry’s nonintentional phenomenology, which transforms the active conscious subject into a passive and affected one. The second part of the article provides a more detailed description of the proto-phenomenon of life, which is central to Henry’s philosophy. In conclusion, the author turns to Henry’s aesthetic heritage and shows that aesthetic experience is the most meaningful experience within Henry’s phenomenology.

Keywords

Michel Henry, nonintentional phenomenology, Husserl in Henry’s conception, protophenomenon of life, aesthetic experience, aestheticization of sense

References

1. Slinin Ya.A. Edmund Gusserl’ i ego “Kartezianskie razmyshleniya” [Edmund Husserl and His Cartesian Meditations]. Husserl E. Logicheskie issledovaniya. Kartezianskie razmyshleniya. Krizis evropeyskikh nauk i transtsendental’naya fenomenologiya. Krizis evropeyskogo chelovechestva i filosofii. Filosofiya kak strogaya nauka [Logical Investigations. Cartesian Meditations. The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology. The Crisis of European Man and Philosophy. Philosophy as Rigorous Science]. Minsk, Moscow, 2000, pp. 290–323.
   
2. Levinas E. Rakursy [Angles]. Levinas E. Izbrannoe. Total’nost’ i beskonechnoe [Selected Works: Totality and Infinity]. Moscow, St. Petersburg, 2000, pp. 292–349.
   
3. Yampol’skaya A.V. Fenomenologiya v Germanii i Frantsii: problemy metoda [Phenomenology in Germany and France: Problems of the Method]. Moscow, 2013. 258 p.
   
4. Ricoeur P. Krizis cogito [The Crisis of the Cogito]. Bessmertie filosofskikh idey Dekarta: materialy Mezhdunar. konf., posvyashch. 400-letiyu so dnya rozhdeniya Rene Dekarta [Immortality of Descartes’ Philosophical Ideas: Proc. Int. Conf. Dedicated to the 400th Birthday Anniversary of René Descartes]. Moscow, 1997, pp. 14–30.
   
5. Sokolov V.V. Filosofiya dukha i materii Rene Dekarta [René Descartess Philosophy of the Spirit and Matter]. Descartes R. Sochineniya: v 2 t. [Works: In 2 Vols.]. Moscow, 1989. Vol. 1, pp. 3–76.
   
6. Fink E. Problema fenomenologii Edmunda Gusserlya [The Problem of Edmund Husserl’s Phenomenology]. Logos, 2016, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 5–46.
   
7. Heidegger M. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen, 1993 (Russ. ed.: Khaydegger M. Bytie i vremya. Kharkov, 2003. 503 p.).
   
8. Welten R. Michel Henry (1922–2002). Handbook of Phenomenological Aesthetics. Ed. by H.R. Sepp, L. Embree. Springer, 2010, pp. 141–144.
   
9. Scheler M. Polozhenie cheloveka v kosmose [The Human Place in the Cosmos]. Scheler M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Selected Works]. Moscow, 1994, pp. 129–194.
   
10. Plessner H. Die Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch. Einleitung in die philosophische Anthropologie. Bonn, 1928 (Russ. ed.: Plesner Kh. Stupeni organicheskogo i chelovek: Vvedenie v filosofskuyu antropologiyu. Moscow, 2004. 368 p.).
    
11. Heidegger M. Osnovnye ponyatiya metafiziki. Mir – Konechnost’ – Odinochestvo [The Basic Concepts of Metaphysics. World – Finiteness – Loneliness]. St. Petersburg, 2013. 592 p.
    
12. Ricoeur P. Life in Quest of Narrative. On Paul Ricoeur: Narrative and Interpretation. Ed. by D. Wood. London, 2003, pp. 20–33.
    
13. Seyler F. Is Radical Phenomenology Too Radical? Paradoxes of Michel Henry’s Phenomenology of Life. J. Specul. Philos., 2013, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 277–286.
    
14. Marion J.-L. Figures de phénoménologie: Husserl, Heidegger, Levinas, Henry, Derrida. Paris, 2012. 222 p.
    
15. Gschwandtner C.M. Revealing the Invisible: Henry and Marion on Aesthetic Experience. J. Specul. Philos., 2014, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 305–314.
    
16. Derrida J. Violence et métaphysique. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 1963, no. 3, pp. 322–354.
    
17. Strasser S. Antiphénoménologie et phénoménologie dans la philosophie d’Emmanuel Levinas. Revue Philosophique de Louvain, 1977, vol. 75, no. 25, pp. 101–125.
    
18. Marion J.-L. Nasyshchennyy fenomen [The Saturated Phenomenon]. (Post)fenomenologiya: novaya fenomenologiya vo Frantsii i za ee predelami [(Post)phenomenology: New Phenomenology in France and Abroad]. Moscow, 2014, pp. 63–99.
    
19. Derrida J. Poétique et politique du témoignage. Paris, 2005. 81 p. 20. Bernet R. Phenomenological and Aesthetic Epoché: Painting the Invisible Things Themselves. The Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Phenomenology. Ed. by D. Zahavi. Oxford, 2012, pp. 715–737.